A news release by the Fort Bragg Public Affairs Office listed the charges presented against Sinclair as including "forcible sodomy, wrongful sexual conduct, attempted violation of an order, violations of regulations by wrongfully engaging in inappropriate relationships and misusing a government travel charge card, violating general orders by possessing alcohol and pornography while deployed, maltreatment of subordinates, filing fraudulent claims, engaging in conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman and engaging in conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces."

Few specifics about the allegations against Sinclair were released Wednesday, but a Defense Department official said "several women were the subject of Sinclair's alleged misconduct."

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

The latter.

Most definitely. The difference over the last few years has been day and night.

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

The latter.

I'd argue the political will faded when it was obvious this was a very long term endeavor...and even then there was no guarantee it would work.

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

The latter.

I'd argue the political will faded when it was obvious this was a very long term endeavor...and even then there was no guarantee it would work.

Makes sense they pulled out in the age of soundbites.

If it ends up as good as Iraq, it's probably a win. That's probably a reachable goal (which says more about where Iraq than about Afghanistan.

Hard to say. Afghanistan's a lost cause so I'm not sure there is going to be any big changes. I thought he should have been the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and never quite understood the appointment to the CIA.

I was under the impression that you thought the unification/modernization/whatever you want to call it of Afghanistan was worthwhile and more importantly possible, do you no longer feel that way? Or are you saying there is not enough political will that makes it a lost cause?

The latter.

I'd argue the political will faded when it was obvious this was a very long term endeavor...and even then there was no guarantee it would work.

Makes sense they pulled out in the age of soundbites.

If it ends up as good as Iraq, it's probably a win. That's probably a reachable goal (which says more about where Iraq than about Afghanistan.

If it ends up as good as Iraq, it's probably a win. That's probably a reachable goal (which says more about where Iraq than about Afghanistan.

Iraq has around $200 billion in redevelopment projects in progress, their economy is growing on the back of their tremendous oil and gas reserves (which will surpass Saudi Arabia in about ten years). Iraq will be like Dubai in twenty years. Afghanistan has some minerals, but they lack the infrastructure and educated populous to exploit it. ie. illiteracy is still very high in Afghanistan.

Iraq has around $200 billion in redevelopment projects in progress, their economy is growing on the back of their tremendous oil and gas reserves (which will surpass Saudi Arabia in about ten years). Iraq will be like Dubai in twenty years.

I wouldn't be that optimistic. The UAE is what it is in large part because it was a sparsely populated coastal region with immense oil and gas resources, which made it relatively easy to "spread the wealth". The entire UAE only has a population of about 8 million, and only 16% of the people there are actually Emirate citizens, the rest are all foreign workers.

Saudi Arabia is probably a closer example, and it's had troubles developing it's real economy and is almost entirely reliant upon it's energy exports.

Whose interest were you hoping for? The Republicans who created the situation? The Democrats who allowed/continued the situation? The mythical subset of liberals who might actually do something about the problem? I mean, I'm not sure what there is to say, sadly. Yeah, it sucks. But it's kind of hard to turn "no torture" into one of the hot-button issues when both major groups in power engage in the practice.

incredible skills by the pilot to be honest, with a ~40t MRAP rolling around in the back he was able to almost immediately level the aircraft and get it nose down to try and get air back under the wings, even among professional pilots there's not many that could have kept that thing from spinning

unfortunately it was unrecoverable, he only had ~900' altitude when his cargo broke loose and he stalled, and even if he had been at 3-4k' and been able to level it out, the runway at bagram ends in a mountain range with ~8k' elevation rise so he was really fucked either way

e: probably not an MRAP as the cargo manifest said 5 vehicles, and theres no way you can lift 5 of those in anything short of an an-225

incredible skills by the pilot to be honest, with a ~40t MRAP rolling around in the back he was able to almost immediately level the aircraft and get it nose down to try and get air back under the wings, even among professional pilots there's not many that could have kept that thing from spinning

unfortunately it was unrecoverable, he only had ~900' altitude when his cargo broke loose and he stalled, and even if he had been at 3-4k' and been able to level it out, the runway at bagram ends in a mountain range with ~8k' elevation rise so he was really fucked either way

Do you have any source on this? I've seen it speculated that some of the cargo may have broken loose and unbalanced the plane, but at the time that was just speculation.

That said if that much weight becomes unsecured and shifts towards the back of the plane, you're pretty much flying a brick and I can't imagine being able to safely recover.

incredible skills by the pilot to be honest, with a ~40t MRAP rolling around in the back he was able to almost immediately level the aircraft and get it nose down to try and get air back under the wings, even among professional pilots there's not many that could have kept that thing from spinning

unfortunately it was unrecoverable, he only had ~900' altitude when his cargo broke loose and he stalled, and even if he had been at 3-4k' and been able to level it out, the runway at bagram ends in a mountain range with ~8k' elevation rise so he was really fucked either way

Do you have any source on this? I've seen it speculated that some of the cargo may have broken loose and unbalanced the plane, but at the time that was just speculation.

That said if that much weight becomes unsecured and shifts towards the back of the plane, you're pretty much flying a brick and I can't imagine being able to safely recover.

Cargo manifest said 5 vehicles, this was reported by several unofficial sources shortly after the crash. I got most of my info from avherald initially. MRAPs are the primary thing we're shipping out of there right now, and 5 MRAPs (~200k lbs) is about what a 747-400F would carry (max payload 225k lbs).

The biggest thing that doesn't make sense to me is why it would go from Bastion to Bagram. The cargo was loaded at Bastion, and Bastion has a big enough runway to handle a fully fueled jet of this size. Bagram is actually going the wrong way if you're headed to Dubai (which it was). No cargo was added at Bagram, nor offloaded.

incredible skills by the pilot to be honest, with a ~40t MRAP rolling around in the back he was able to almost immediately level the aircraft and get it nose down to try and get air back under the wings, even among professional pilots there's not many that could have kept that thing from spinning

unfortunately it was unrecoverable, he only had ~900' altitude when his cargo broke loose and he stalled, and even if he had been at 3-4k' and been able to level it out, the runway at bagram ends in a mountain range with ~8k' elevation rise so he was really fucked either way

Do you have any source on this? I've seen it speculated that some of the cargo may have broken loose and unbalanced the plane, but at the time that was just speculation.

That said if that much weight becomes unsecured and shifts towards the back of the plane, you're pretty much flying a brick and I can't imagine being able to safely recover.

Cargo manifest said 5 vehicles, this was reported by several unofficial sources shortly after the crash. I got most of my info from avherald initially. MRAPs are the primary thing we're shipping out of there right now, and 5 MRAPs (~200k lbs) is about what a 747-400F would carry (max payload 225k lbs).

The biggest thing that doesn't make sense to me is why it would go from Bastion to Bagram. The cargo was loaded at Bastion, and Bastion has a big enough runway to handle a fully fueled jet of this size. Bagram is actually going the wrong way if you're headed to Dubai (which it was). No cargo was added at Bagram, nor offloaded.

I guess I missed the bus on this one. What exactly happened? Keep in mind there are many different vehicles that fall within the MRAP family, but anything outta Bastion should have been okay. The Royals that load those planes are top notch. FWIW I just came home from my 2nd deployment in Afghanistan (Army) and was part of the main effort in the Marjha op in 2010.

I guess I missed the bus on this one. What exactly happened? Keep in mind there are many different vehicles that fall within the MRAP family, but anything outta Bastion should have been okay. The Royals that load those planes are top notch. FWIW I just came home from my 2nd deployment in Afghanistan (Army) and was part of the main effort in the Marjha op in 2010.

Supposedly load planning was handled by the civilian loadmaster (who was onboard). We're not entirely sure what happened yet as there hasn't even been a preliminary official report, there's a video on the avherald page I linked that shows the stall and crash. It could entirely be a case of confirmation bias, but the way the jet moves it sure looks like something suddenly pulls it back and to the left.

I don't have a link, since this came from an email from Foreign Policy.

Quote:

Karzai versus Obama: Frustration, accusations, and a bad VTC. The U.S. may accelerate the drawdown of forces in Afghanistan in part due to the souring relationship between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and President Obama. The NYT reports this morning that Obama has become increasingly annoyed, especially after the prospect of peace talks stumbled out of the gate last month. A video teleconference between the two men, aimed to defuse tensions, only worsened them. Now the "zero option" for a residual force, long thought to be a negotiating tactic, is back on the table. The NYT: The option of leaving no troops in Afghanistan after 2014 was gaining momentum before the June 27 teleconference, according to the officials. But since then, the idea of a complete military exit similar to the American military pullout from Iraq has gone from being considered the worst-case scenario - and a useful negotiating tool with Mr. Karzai - to an alternative under serious consideration in Washington and Kabul.

"The officials cautioned that no decisions had been made on the pace of the pullout and exactly how many American troops to leave behind in Afghanistan. The goal remains negotiating a long-term security deal, they said, but the hardening of negotiating stances on both sides could result in a repeat of what happened in Iraq, where a deal failed to materialize despite widespread expectations that a compromise would be reached and American forces would remain."

A senior Western official, to the NYT: "There's always been a zero option, but it was not seen as the main option... It is now becoming one of them, and if you listen to some people in Washington, it is maybe now being seen as a realistic path."